Partly allowed

Marg Darshan Foundation,Public Charitable Trust v. Nishakar Rout

Orissa HC25 Nov 2022CRLMC/3404/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings in three cases pending before the SDJM, Bhubaneswar. Despite one offence under Section 294 IPC being non-compoundable, the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to terminate the litigation due to a valid compromise and full settlement of Rs. 28 lakh between the parties.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in I.C.C. No.2245 of 2015, C.T. Case No.3172 of 2015, and I.C.C. No.2244 of 2015 pending before SDJM, Bhubaneswar were quashed.

Marg Darshan Foundation,Public Charitable Trust Vs Nishakar… — Cheque Dishonour | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.3404 of 2022

¶3

Marg Darshan Foundation and Another ….

¶4

Petitioners

¶5

Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate

-Versus-

Nishakar Rout

…. Opposite Party

Mr. A. Nayak, Advocate for O.P.

¶10

CRLMC No.3317 of 2022

¶11

Surabala Sahoo …. Petitioner
Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha and Another …. Opposite Parties
Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, ASC
Mr. A. Nayak, Advocate for O.P. No.2
CRLMC No.3406 of 2022
Marg Darshan Foundation and Another …. Petitioners
Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate
-Versus-
Nishakar Rout …. Opposite Party
Mr. A. Nayak, Advocate for O.P.

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No. 01.

25.11.2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State besides learned counsel for opposite party No.2.

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

Instant petitions have been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the criminal proceedings in connection with (1CC No.2245 of 2015 in CRLMC No.3404 of 2022), (C.T. Case No.3172 of 2015 in CRLMC No.3317 of 2022) and (1CC No.2244 of 2015 in CRLMC No.3406 of 2022) respectively on the ground of compromise and a settlement reached at between the parties with an understanding to bring all the litigations to an end.

¶20

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that such a compromise has been arrived at in the meantime and on account of such an amicable settlement, the informant has agreed to accept an amount of Rs.28 lac towards full and final settlement and under the above circumstances, the criminal proceedings which are pending before the learned court below should be terminated in the interest of justice. While claiming so, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners files an affidavit sworn by opposite party No.2 (CRLMC No.3317 of 2022) which is to cover the other two cases wherein the fact of compromise has been stated with an understanding that he is to receive said amount of Rs.28 lac from one of the petitioners, namely, wife of late Gangadhar Sahoo. The learned counsel for opposite party No.2 admits the fact of such settlement between the parties.

¶21

The informant and one of the petitioners, namely, Surabala Sahoo being present in the Court today have produced the original Aadhar cards in support of their identity proof and admit the fact of compromise. Besides that, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted demand drafts for total amount of Rs.28 lac payable to the informant for the Court’s perusal. It is contended by Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned counsel for the petitioners that since there is a compromise and Page 2 of 4

¶22

toward final settlement, an amount of Rs.28 lac is ready for payment to the informant, the proceedings which have been pending before the court below should be quashed in exercise of the Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶23

Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the aforesaid development, appropriate orders may be passed by the Court.

¶24

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after such compromise, the informant has agreed to return both the cheques which stood dishonoured along with the original agreement which he had to Ms. Surabala Sahoo, wife of late Gangadhar Sahoo.

¶25

Having regard to the above facts and submissions of respective parties and keeping in view the position of law enunciated by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi and others Vrs. State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 and followed in plethora of other decisions which is with regard to the powers of the Court to exercise inherent as well as writ jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings, the Court is of the view that it is fit where on account of the compromise and settlement between the parties, the criminal proceedings pending before the court of learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar should be brought to an end notwithstanding the fact that one of the offences under Section 294 IPC non-compoundable in nature.

¶26

Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶27

In the result, CRLMCs stand disposed of. Consequently, the criminal proceedings in connection with (1CC No.2245 of 2015 in CRLMC No.3404 of 2022), (C.T. Case No.3172 of 2015 in CRLMC

¶28

Page 3 of 4

¶29

No.3317 of 2022) and (1CC No.2244 of 2015 in CRLMC No.3406 of 2022) pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar are hereby quashed.

¶30

Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶31

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶32

Tudu

¶33

Page 4 of 4

Marg Darshan Foundation,Public Charitable Trust v. Nishakar Rout

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marg Darshan Foundation,Public Charitable Trust v. Nishakar Rout

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kora Barada@Kora Prasad Barada Vs State of Odisha

Srikanta Kumar Samal Vs State of Odisha

Sarada Prasan Kar Vs State of Odisha

Khirod Rana Vs State of Odisha

Pradyumna Kumar Pradhan@Pradyumna Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Karunakar Nayak Vs State of Odisha